其实我比你更悲观。即使iNat运营方把港澳台当作中国的一部分，iNat仍可能被封锁，因为它有多个政治“敏感”点：不受中国政府控制，允许中外用户对话而不审查，涉及“生物安全”信息，数据存储在美国，涉及环保议题，等等。（相比之下，iNat的益处看来并不显著有利于中国政府。）中国政府是否封锁、何时封锁、如何封锁的决策也不透明、不受控制，这个政府如果下一秒就封锁iNat，或者永远不管iNat，都可以解释，白白增加了热心的中国用户的自我审查而已。
(translation of dctm’s reply here:)
Objectively speaking, (the practice of) iNat: dividing China into several parts, labeling Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan as “Country” for a long time, and violating the so-called (rule) of “one China”, is bound to increase the risk of being blocked
(translation of my reply here:)
In fact, I am more pessimistic than you. Even if iNat operators treat Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan as parts of China, iNat may still be blocked, because it has several politically “sensitive” features: it is not controlled by the Chinese government, allows Chinese and foreign users to communicate without censorship, contains info about “biosecurity”, stores data in the USA, involves environmental protection issues, and so on. (In contrast, the benefits of iNat may not be significantly beneficial to the Chinese government.) The Chinese government’s decision on whether, when, and how to block iNat is also not transparent or controllable. If this government blocks iNat in the next second, or never blocks it, this can always be explained, increasing the self-censorship of enthusiastic Chinese users but bringing no other benefit.